BREAKING: Cypher Is Leaked By Someone In Pak Military!!

[AlKardai]

Well this....means absolutely nothing.
The slave awaam clearly don't care

 

[Sugarcane]

March 7, 2022 Pakistani Diplomatic Cypher (Transcription)​

I had a luncheon meeting today with Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, Donald Lu. He was accompanied by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Les Viguerie. DCM, DA and Counsellor Qasim joined me.
At the outset, Don referred to Pakistan’s position on the Ukraine crisis and said that “people here and in Europe are quite concerned about why Pakistan is taking such an aggressively neutral position (on Ukraine), if such a position is even possible. It does not seem such a neutral stand to us.” He shared that in his discussions with the NSC, “it seems quite clear that this is the Prime Minister’s policy.” He continued that he was of the view that this was “tied to the current political dramas in Islamabad that he (Prime Minister) needs and is trying to show a public face.” I replied that this was not a correct reading of the situation as Pakistan’s position on Ukraine was a result of intense interagency consultations. Pakistan had never resorted to conducting diplomacy in public sphere. The Prime Minister’s remarks during a political rally were in reaction to the public letter by European Ambassadors in Islamabad which was against diplomatic etiquette and protocol. Any political leader, whether in Pakistan or the U.S., would be constrained to give a public reply in such a situation.
I asked Don if the reason for a strong U.S. reaction was Pakistan’s abstention in the voting in the UNGA. He categorically replied in the negative and said that it was due to the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow. He said that “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.” He paused and then said “I cannot tell how this will be seen by Europe but I suspect their reaction will be similar.” He then said that “honestly I think isolation of the Prime Minister will become very strong from Europe and the United States.” Don further commented that it seemed that the Prime Minister’s visit to Moscow was planned during the Beijing Olympics and there was an attempt by the Prime Minister to meet Putin which was not successful and then this idea was hatched that he would go to Moscow.
I told Don that this was a completely misinformed and wrong perception. The visit to Moscow had been in the works for at least few years and was the result of a deliberative institutional process. I stressed that when the Prime Minister was flying to Moscow, Russian invasion of Ukraine had not started and there was still hope for a peaceful resolution. I also pointed out that leaders of European countries were also traveling to Moscow around the same time. Don interjected that “those visits were specifically for seeking resolution of the Ukraine standoff while the Prime Minister’s visit was for bilateral economic reasons.” I drew his attention to the fact that the Prime Minister clearly regretted the situation while being in Moscow and had hoped for diplomacy to work. The Prime Minister’s visit, I stressed, was purely in the bilateral context and should not be seen either as a condonation or endorsement of Russia’s action against Ukraine. I said that our position is dictated by our desire to keep the channels of communication with all sides open. Our subsequent statements at the UN and by our Spokesperson spelled that out clearly, while reaffirming our commitment to the principle of UN Charter, non-use or threat of use of force, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, and pacific settlement of disputes.
I also told Don that Pakistan was worried of how the Ukraine crisis would play out in the context of Afghanistan. We had paid a very high price due to the long-term impact of this conflict. Our priority was to have peace and stability in Afghanistan, for which it was imperative to have cooperation and coordination with all major powers, including Russia. From this perspective as well, keeping the channels of communication open was essential. This factor was also dictating our position on the Ukraine crisis. On my reference to the upcoming Extended Troika meeting in Beijing, Don replied that there were still ongoing discussions in Washington on whether the U.S. should attend the Extended Troika meeting or the upcoming Antalya meeting on Afghanistan with Russian representatives in attendance, as the U.S. focus right now was to discuss only Ukraine with Russia. I replied that this was exactly what we were afraid of. We did not want the Ukraine crisis to divert focus away from Afghanistan. Don did not comment.
I told Don that just like him, I would also convey our perspective in a forthright manner. I said that over the past one year, we had been consistently sensing reluctance on the part of the U.S. leadership to engage with our leadership. This reluctance had created a perception in Pakistan that we were being ignored and even taken for granted. There was also a feeling that while the U.S. expected Pakistan’s support on all issues that were important to the U.S., it did not reciprocate and we do not see much U.S. support on issues of concern for Pakistan, particularly on Kashmir. I said that it was extremely important to have functioning channels of communication at the highest level to remove such perception. I also said that we were surprised that if our position on the Ukraine crisis was so important for the U.S., why the U.S. had not engaged with us at the top leadership level prior to the Moscow visit and even when the UN was scheduled to vote. (The State Department had raised it at the DCM level.) Pakistan valued continued high-level engagement and for this reason the Foreign Minister sought to speak with Secretary Blinken to personally explain Pakistan’s position and perspective on the Ukraine crisis. The call has not materialized yet. Don replied that the thinking in Washington was that given the current political turmoil in Pakistan, this was not the right time for such engagement and it could wait till the political situation in Pakistan settled down.
I reiterated our position that countries should not be made to choose sides in a complex situation like the Ukraine crisis and stressed the need for having active bilateral communications at the political leadership level. Don replied that “you have conveyed your position clearly and I will take it back to my leadership.”
I also told Don that we had seen his defence of the Indian position on the Ukraine crisis during the recently held Senate Sub-Committee hearing on U.S.-India relations. It seemed that the U.S. was applying different criteria for India and Pakistan. Don responded that the U.S. lawmakers’ strong feelings about India’s abstentions in the UNSC and UNGA came out clearly during the hearing. I said that from the hearing, it appeared that the U.S. expected more from India than Pakistan, yet it appeared to be more concerned about Pakistan’s position. Don was evasive and responded that Washington looked at the U.S.-India relationship very much through the lens of what was happening in China. He added that while India had a close relationship with Moscow, “I think we will actually see a change in India’s policy once all Indian students are out of Ukraine.”
I expressed the hope that the issue of the Prime Minister’s visit to Russia will not impact our bilateral ties. Don replied that “I would argue that it has already created a dent in the relationship from our perspective. Let us wait for a few days to see whether the political situation changes, which would mean that we would not have a big disagreement about this issue and the dent would go away very quickly. Otherwise, we will have to confront this issue head on and decide how to manage it.”
We also discussed Afghanistan and other issues pertaining to bilateral ties. A separate communication follows on that part of our conversation.
Assessment
Don could not have conveyed such a strong demarche without the express approval of the White House, to which he referred repeatedly. Clearly, Don spoke out of turn on Pakistan’s internal political process. We need to seriously reflect on this and consider making an appropriate demarche to the U.S. Cd’ A a.i in Islamabad.
​

 

[TheSolution]

@PanzerKiel @_NOBODY_ @Mirzali Khan @kingQamaR @Menace2Society @Meengla @Goritoes

 

[nahtanbob]

Khan had charted a neutral course on the Ukraine conflict which had aggravated the U.S. side and led them to push for his removal. Today, with Khan gone, Pakistan is no longer neutral and emerged as a significant arms supplier to Ukraine:

Do you have any idea how many billions in weapons USA has supplied Ukraine ?

Seriously tell us what % of Ukraine's weapons come from Pakistan. Put a dollar amount

 

[TheSolution]

It was leaked by someone in the army

"The document was provided to The Intercept by a source within Pakistan's military establishment who said they had been disillusioned by the impact of the crisis on the institution and wished to alert the public and fellow servicemembers of the documented truth of the story"

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Elhamdulillah. Subhan'Allah. Masha'Allah. Allahu Akbar....

HE GIVES a temporary leeway to the criminals, not a permanent relief....

Now, they've no where to hide.......

Few lines from Ustad Sezai Karakoch's O Beloved depicting the current condition in Pak:

Don't you ever say fate for beyond fate there's a fate
Whatever they might do there's a providence coming from the empty sky
So what if the sun sinks, there's an architect restoring the night
If I am burnt there's a fortress built of my ashes
There is a victory growing defeat by defeat
In you there's the key to reaching the secret of all secrets
In your breast there is a vein that summons your exiles to return
I won't give up hope in you, there's a tree called mercy in your heart

Beloved
Most beloved
Oh, beloved

 

[DGMO]

I'm sure the Agricultural Department is working overtime hitting all media channels to not report this.

But its leak helps to discredit many who denied its existence, especially those within the Pakistan Dakoo Mafia.

 

[PK784]

"Lu told him that the damage was real but not fatal, and with Khan gone, the relationship could go back to normal."

Funny enough the situation never did go back to normal. IMF bailout was a stuggle. No Biden phone call etc

 

[alphapak]

We knew all along that the Generals are lapdogs of Americans.

 

[maithil]

Well.. this settles the matter. Pakistan’s Army is punishing Imran on behalf of America. That's why such muted response on him being jailed.

 

[Olympus81]

When was this leak made?

It seems that Bajwa through Haqqani was probably something in direct conflict with state policy. The investigative journalist Waqas alluded to this.

 

[Redbeanpaste]

I find this hard to believe.

What earth shattering problem would the US have to face if Pakistan visits Russia?

 

[DGMO]

When was this leak made?

No idea,

But the length of the article and the detail it goes into suggests The Intercept been sitting on this for some days whilst they do this write up.

 

[DGMO]

Very heartening to know there are brave and principled souls in the PakMil to expose this. Key detail on why they wanted it leaked:

The Intercept’s source, who had access to the document as a member of the military, spoke of their growing disillusionment with the country’s military leadership, the impact on the military’s morale following its involvement in the political fight against Khan, the exploitation of the memory of dead service members for political purposes in recent military propaganda, and widespread public disenchantment with the armed forces amid the crackdown. ​

​

They believe the military is pushing Pakistan toward a crisis similar to the one in 1971 that led to the secession of Bangladesh.​

​

The source added that they hoped the leaked document would finally confirm what ordinary people, as well as the rank and file of the armed forces, had long suspected about the Pakistani military and force a reckoning within the institution.​

 

[Olympus81]

From what has been quoted above the gist of it is what was mentioned earlier.

But again, quite disturbing on why did Donald Lu say what he did.

But if it serves to right the wrongs the military has made in the recent past then its a net positive.